Gary was talking about the Temple & relating it to the Body of Christ, so I wanted to show that we have a different purpose than Israel. I said -

Quote:

`However the Body of Christ is of a different order, KingPriests, where there is no `male or female, `differences. To be given a body like Christ`s, & where there is no marriage (in heaven) shows that it is a new body for a new order of beings.`

And you enquired –

Quote:

`I don`t really understand what you are trying to say.....What do you mean by a new order of beings. I can`t say I have ever heard that expression from a Christian point of view. Thank you.`

A very interesting question, Sage, & one I would loved to expound upon.

`The Body of Christ is of a different order, Kingpriests.`

`Jesus...having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.` (Heb. 6: 20)

`The Lord (God) has sworn & will not change His mind, Thou (Christ) art a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.` (Ps. 110: 4)

`Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the Lord, & He who will bear the honour, & sit & rule on His throne. Thus He will be a priest on His throne, & the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.` (Zech. 6: 13)

The order of Melchizedek is a King Priest – a royal Priest. Previously in Israel there were kings & there were priests but they were separate offices. However Father God is saying that with Christ He is a King & a Priest, (as the type Melchizedek was). It is a different order than the Aaronic Priesthood that was only temporary & added because of transgressions. But Christ`s order of Priesthood (KingPriest) is before the Aaronic Priesthood & not temporary –

`the former priests, on the other hand, existed in greater numbers, because they were prevented by death from continuing, but He, on the other hand, because He abides forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.` (Heb. 23 – 25)

Now Christ being a High Priest shows that there are other priests, (High Priest over other priests) & these would be of the same order – King Priest. And you would know we have been told that –

`He has made us to be kings & Priests to His God & Father...` (Rev. 1: 6)

A new order of beings, King Priests with a body like Christ`s that can go through time & space.

` He must rise from the dead...` (John 20: 9) `when the doors were shut ....Jesus came & stood in their midst.` (John 20: 19`He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son.` (Rom. 8: 29)`When He appears, we shall be like Him,...` (1 John 3: 2)`For this perishable must put on the imperishable, & this mortal must put on immortality.` (1 Cor. 15: 53)

That is part of your questions Sage. I`ll give time for others to comment if they wish.

Thank you for your thoughts.
Just a general comment first. Some people think, why do we study Eschatology or the eternal Purposes, as that is for the future, but they do not realise that these important topics actually effect our everyday life, right to the core, as our discussion today will show.

The foundations – Because we haven`t known each other very long it can seem like you are on one continent & I`m on another & we are both shouting to be heard. But as we travel more together & discuss various topics a greater understanding of each other – attitude & beliefs – foundations develop. Gary & I have been on Andrew Strom`s site for a while so we have developed an understanding of the other person & trust has built. (foundations) I know that as we all share more on OO that the joy of `comprehending with all the saints....` & `as each joint supplies...` we`ll `grow up into Christ who is our Head.` What an awesome journey.

Error – I am very thankful to William who pointed out to me my error re: Rev. 4: 2 on the word, `One.` I am pleased to be shown my error & the truth, as who wants to live in the dark, but rather desire to come more into His light, His truth, because that is what changes us by His Holy Spirit, as we all know. And I`m sure I`ll need more corrections as we discuss more topics.

KingPriests – Because of our carnal nature we all have to address the error of believing kingship means, `lording it over, superior, & other subservient, etc.` Our selfishness desires to be kingpin. Have our own way, be first, be entitled etc, etc & this shows up in everyday life especially to those closest to us. Everyday we have the choice to be first or be the servant.

Today`s reading by the Holy Spirit through Gary is all about being that servant & that is the heart of what Christ means when He says that we will rule with Him. It is as a servant, (servant king). We find that hard to get our head around as these concepts seem totally opposite, but as we by the Holy Spirit learn to `rule our own spirit,` & humble ourselves under His mighty hand, die to self daily then we are being prepared to –

- (Servant) rule on His throne. (Rev. 3: 20)
- If we endure, we shall also (servant) reign with Him. (2 Tim. 2: 12)
- We shall (servant) judge the world system. (1 Cor. 6: 2)
- We shall (servant) judge (fallen) angels. (1 Cor. 6: 3)
- The Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve...` (Matt. 20: 28)

So Kingpriest might sound grandiose but it is not what our carnal minds imagine, but a totally new order of servant hearts – for our Kingpriest is a servant king.

Sorry Gary, I don`t mean to quote you out of context but your comment re the temple & women in the Body of Christ, to me, shows that you are connecting the two. I was trying to point out that they are two different purposes of God.

"However the Body of Christ is of a different order, KingPriests,
where there is no `male or female,` differences. To be given a body like Christ`s, & where there is no marriage (in heaven) shows that it is a new body for a new order of beings."

Then I asked:

Is it because in heaven there is no marriage therefore it is okay for women to be called to the 5-fold ministry of teacher or pastor or evangelist or apostle?

I am just wondering if you believe they can function in these offices.

I'm starting to understand what everyone is saying here. I don't think we can come up with all new types of Wording that does not exist in the Word of God.

For instance: New Order of Beings. No where is this term used by Paul or any of the Apostles. Unless you can establish what you are saying in the mouth of two or three witnesses in scripture it all becomes bogus.

In college when you are told to write a paper on a certain Biblical subject you must prove all your statements with scripture. Everything must be proven with scripture, and that means not pulling one out of context to prove a point, and adding your own interpretation.

Since what your saying is not found in scripture it then sounds like new age information. Your completely adding new terms here that are not Bible based.

Whenever you start saying things that are not found directly in scripture then it makes everything you say suspect. I thought it was just cultural terms here that was the issue but now I see your adding things to the Bible that have no basis in scripture.

Do you have a web page with a doctrinal creed that your church propagates? The information your stating sounds like it comes from a different Book then the Bible.

Thankyou for bringing my attention to the other part of your good questions. I said -

Quote:

"However the Body of Christ is of a different order, KingPriests, where there is no `male or female,` differences. To be given a body like Christ`s, & where there is no marriage (in heaven) shows that it is a new body for a new order of beings."

Body of Christ - Kingpriests. `He has made us to be kingpriests to His God & Father...` (Rev. 1: 6)
`But ye are....a royal priesthood...` (1 Peter 2: 9)

No male or female - `For all of you who were baptised into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.` (Gal. 3: 28)

No marriage in heaven -`Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures, or the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.` (Mark 12: 24 & 25)

People in the Body of Christ are a new creature, a new creation, a new being. (2 Cor. 5: 17)

`Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature.`
`Therefore, if any one is in union with Christ, he is a new being..` (TCNT - The Twentieth century New testament.)

Order - `Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, & not be designated according to the order of Aaron?` (Heb. 7: 11)

`New creations under Christ`s Royal Priesthood in the order of Melchizedek.`

This is what I have written to Gary so I hope that is in language that we can understand & agree on.

William hasn't 'transfered the power"lol of moderating on these newest Sections so rather than just 'fix' peoples mistakes I will just have to point them out<kindly>. Your quoting of II Corinthians 6:17 in a couple of posts isn't correct, I believe you meant II Corinthians 5:17.

Also, I believe your answer to Sue about whether you believe women can/should hold the offices or positions of the 5-fold isn't clear. (I think I already have a clear understanding that you do believe that, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

And while this certainly isn't a 'rule' amongest us, generally we use the KJV; so it's possible(and even very likely) that you're drawing conclusions from scripture different than we are using various translations.

[Updated on: Thu, 05 December 2013 17:41]

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God."

Thank you for the correction & help re KJ. Also will answer Sage soon on that point. I thought I would change the heading to help everyone but I noticed that everyone`s individual headings were still the other one, so I changed it back.

Sorry to have made such a confusion on my posts. Now your question is -

Quote:

`Is it because in heaven there is no marriage therefore it is okay for women to be called to the 5-fold ministry of teacher or pastor or evangelist or apostle?`

No that is not what I meant as I was trying to explain the difference between the old order of priests & Christ`s `new` order.(which actually was before the Aaronic order of priests)

But you did ask about women & the 5-fold ministries. I was brought up to believe they were just men. And these ministries should always function together & not be isolated from each other.

Personally I don`t like women running Christian organisations as the sole leader. To me there should always be multiple leadership responsibility. And in todays`s Christian organisations we see more of the CEO type of leadership & not necessarily the 5-fold ministries.

Finally I believe God gifts women as Shepherds, teachers, evangelists but I have not seen the 5-fold Prophetic or Apostleship by a woman as yet - but that is only my observation. Christ is the Head & through out many countries there could be these operating as such.

I hear what you are saying. So does this sound correct, from 2 Cor. 5: 17 -

`Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature.`
`Therefore, if any one is in union with Christ, he is a new being..` (TCNT - The Twentieth century New testament.)

(from 26 translations of the Holy Bible)

New creations under Christ`s Royal Priesthood in the order of Melchizedek.

And so how would you say what we are?

Marilyn.

Duhhhh! You should of shared this sooner. I did not realize this other translation. Most of the scriptures I have memorized are from the KJV, but presently I read the NKJV.

Thanks for clarifying this you may want to switch versions when trying to explain this stuff. It sounded like a foreign language for a minute. There was another word I seen you use, it was terrestrial but I understood what you were saying there.

Sorry to cause such confusion. But we can all have a laugh. Yes I will certainly try & stick to James` name sake. (King James - has a nice ring about it doesn`t it James!!!!!!!)

Now you said the New King James. Is that the New Order of Book for the New Order Of beings!!!!! I think I may have to have `joke lessons,` from you & James, or rather leave it to you both as a duo with William`s voice coming from on high sometimes.

I am not bringing out any new doctrine. However I hope that together we all can read God`s word to clarify what He is saying to us.

I see scripture tells us that we are in Christ & of His priesthood, which is of the order of Melchizedek, (King Priest).

In the tabernacle when Aaron was High Priest over other priests, they were his sons but they were not Royal, & their offices were not perpetual & their sacrifices were not spiritual, etc.
With Christ who is our High Priest, He is Royal, & His office is eternal & his sacrifice & offerings are forever effectual. (Heb.Ch.7&8)

And as our High Priest –`it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things & by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory...` (Heb. 2: 10)

Now sons of God brings with it responsibility & we are told that we will be kings & priests. Kingship – activity, Priesthood – worship.

Christ is a priest & as a High Priest He is over other priests (sons).
Christ is a king & as King of kings He is over other kings. (sons)

Thus we will be kings & priests of Christ`s eternal Priesthood & not of the Aaronic order of priests which were not royal & only tempory.

KingPriests - Because of our carnal nature we all have to address the error of believing kingship means, "lording it over, superior, and other subservient, etc." Our selfishness desires to be kingpin. Have our own way, be first, be entitled etc, etc and this shows up in everyday life especially to those closest to us. Everyday we have the choice to be first or be the servant. Today's reading by the Holy Spirit through Gary is all about being that servant and that is the heart of what Christ means when He says that we will rule with Him. It is as a servant, (servant king). We find that hard to get our head around as these concepts seem totally opposite, but as we by the Holy Spirit learn to "rule our own spirit," and humble ourselves under His mighty hand, die to self daily then we are being prepared to -

Most of us know this, if not in practice (yet) at least in theory. We have no desire to "lord over" anyone. You can"t walk in the Spirit very long and not be overwhelmed with the stench of authoritarianism that is prevalent all around us. Jesus has given us a taste of freedom and we eschew the idea of losing it and we certainly don"t want to put anyone else under that kind of bondage.

Quote:

"He has made us to be kings & Priests to His God & Father..." Rev. 1:6

Here is where I'm a little unclear... are you taking this verse to be future? Some of the things you have said indicate that you are. The verse isn't speaking of some future event even if it sounds like it is in the translation that you quote.

The KJV translates it: "And hath made us kings and priests unto God..."

The grk verb translated "hath made" is an "aorist active indicative" which means that we who are in Christ, are already kings and priests. This isn't some future event that takes place when our bodies are changed.

With that information in mind we ought to be able to look at the lives of Paul, Peter, John and others in the NT and find examples that show us exactly how the phrase "kings and priests" applies to our lives. I think it was Gary that mentioned it, but what you need to do is show us a real biblical example of someone who walked in this king/priest office and then show us how the "new order" you describe is something different than what we are now.

The same is true concerning the "new creation in Christ". We already are new creations in Christ: Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. [2Cr 5:17 KJV]

This is already a "done-deal" as we say here in the west.

Are things going to be different when we receive our new bodies? Certainly... but we ought not use these particular passages to tout some future new order because they aren't applicable in that sense. Both passages should be presently active in our lives right now.

Before this you seem to indicate that the kings/priests order is a present reality and then move on to speak of the way it is in heaven (which is the reason I said I'm unclear about your meaning) --you said: (and Sage asked you about it)

Quote:

"However the Body of Christ is of a different order, KingPriests, where there is no "male or female, "differences. To be given a body like Christ's, & where there is no marriage (in heaven) shows that it is a new body for a new order of beings."

Obviously the first part --the body of Christ, is a present reality while the second part --in heaven, is yet future. I guess my question is: why are you using the "new order" language (about the angels in heaven) to prove your contention about the present order of things in the body of Christ (where marriages exist and where we are not like the angels in heaven)? You can"t mix up the dispensations, otherwise the body of Christ should quit procreating (and all of the other stuff that goes along with that) and be like the angels! <grin>

Lastly, I was only half joking about the kings/priests (always male in the OT) and the queens/priestess comment. My point was that if you are going to use a new word like kingpriest, you might as well coin one that would be more relevant to your point about female leadership, and a good one to use would be queenpriestess. I wasn't aware of any song or group that used those words so any humor based on that was way over my head!

After reading Williams comment the title of this topic would read: New Order of New Creations.

Something doesn't sound right in either title.

We are new creations/beings now, in heaven what takes place we only have a small idea because we look through the mirror dimly and do not have full understanding.

12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.

Marilyn why do you use this version of the Bible, Do you think its closer to the Greek/Hebrew or what?

The New King James Version that I use does away with old archaic words that we do not use today, like thee, thou, etc. I do find though some words are not from literal greek but I think this is because of copyright laws, but it is closer to the original text for the most part.

Most of us know this, if not in practice (yet) at least in theory. We
have no desire to "lord over" anyone. You can't walk in the Spirit
very long and not be overwhelmed with the stench of authoritarianism
that is prevalent all around us. Jesus has given us a taste of freedom
and we eschew the idea of losing it and we certainly don't want to put
anyone else under that kind of bondage.

Don't want to change the thread here of any investigation or interrogation of Marilyn's doctrines. LOLOLOL

But my wife and I was talking about this subject the other day, that William mentioned above. Give some one a little authority or some title in life and immediately they wave it around like they hit the lottery. I think it has to deal with "self" importance or "self" esteem.

Someone at her place of employment had a new position of authority and power and it changed they way they thought and acted.

Anyway there is a lot of truth in what your sharing here and sadly it carries over into the body of Christ.

For some reason certain titles carry an air of importance to some and it elevates them over their fellow man. Even titles with in the five fold bring a level of importance to peoples minds.

Its easy to talk about dying to self, actual living it is a whole different ballgame.

But you did ask about women & the 5-fold ministries. I was brought up to believe they were just men. And these ministries should always function together & not be isolated from each other.

Personally I don`t like women running Christian organisations as the sole leader. To me there should always be multiple leadership responsibility. And in todays`s Christian organisations we see more of the CEO type of leadership & not necessarily the 5-fold ministries.

Finally I believe God gifts women as Shepherds, teachers, evangelists but I have not seen the 5-fold Prophetic or Apostleship by a woman as yet - but that is only my observation. Christ is the Head & through out many countries there could be these operating as such.

I’m assuming you mean by Christian organizations the local church. I agree that women should not be the leader of a church, and for that matter I don’t even care for them to be CEO’s or Supervisors in the work place. In all my years of working I have only had one female boss that was any good. She had the respect of all who worked under her, both male and female. The other female bosses all seemed to have something to prove, or a pride issue, or domineering/authoritative attitudes.

From the beginning of time God has set male leadership in all aspects of our lives, the Temple, the home, the local assembly, and the government. I can’t think of anyplace in the New Testament where God put women in a position of leadership in the church. There were men elders, men pastors, men apostles, men evangelist, men teachers all functioning in the 5-fold ministry in the church. The only 5-fold position that could possibly be a female was prophetess. I don’t see that as having changed.

The women in God’s eyes are not less than the man, but has a different function in the home and the local assembly. Because God calls the man to be the head of the home and the local assembly does not make the women inferior in God’s eye. Maybe because we see so little male leadership in all aspects of our society there are major issues with the children, including things like ADD, ADHD, Autism, Sexual Orientation problems, Asthma, and God only knows what else. Not making a doctrine here, just a thought.

For the man to be the leader of a home is an awesome responsibility, and needs a wife who will be a Godly helpmeet for him. She isn’t a doormat, or subservient to him, but rather has a different function in the family. There has to be a leader in the home and church, therefore God has chosen the man to function in this capacity. Where God calls, He will enable. The human body has various functions, so I believe that is why the Lord called the local assembly the body of Christ, each having their specific function. When we are all doing as God has called, it is a beautiful thing, but when people are functioning where they are not called it can cause confusion and deception. I asked a male pastor what he thought of women pastors, and his response was quite insightful to me. “When you have more and more women in positions of pastors and leadership positions, it will gradually make the men quit coming to church, and it will be mostly women going to church, the men will stay home.” I couldn’t agree more.

I don’t even like to see women leading worship, or being deacons, let alone elders as so many denominations have now. It is the frog in the water. A church or denomination compromises just a little with God’s divine order, and it opens the door to deception. And just because someone is a male, does not automatically place him in the 5-fold ministry, but only if he meets the scriptural requirements and is called by God to function in such position. Just because a women is not in the 5-fold ministry does not mean she can't share with others what God has taught her.

But in saying all that, it doesn’t mean men are infallible. We all, male and female, need to know doctrine and the truths of God’s word, so we can each, individually discern what is of God and what isn’t. It will be each of us individually standing before God one day, with no one to blame if we allow ourselves to follow any deception. Blaming others goes all the way back to the garden, we need to take personal responsibility for our own actions and beliefs.

Thank you for being interested in what I believe & I do appreciate your comments & study. We all know these wonderful truths & it`s good to meditate on them for it brings forth thanksgiving, awe & praises to our wonderful Lord & Saviour, Jesus Christ. I hope I can explain myself to you.

Now I believe what you say in relation to the now & then aspect. God tells us we are His sons but we have not yet come into our full inheritance. This new life, as God`s sons, is the resurrection life of Christ that is being formed in us, as we all know, however to be given full responsibility & authority as kings & priests comes with maturity, (in heaven) Here are some scriptures so we can get God`s thoughts.

`The first man Adam became a living being. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.`(1 Cor. 15: 45) (Christ`s resurrection life.)`But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God....` (John 1: 12) (sons of God)`And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, `Abba, Father!` Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, & if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.` (Gal. 4: 6 & 7) (sons & heirs)`The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, & if children, then heirs – heirs of God & joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.` (Rom. 8: 16 & 17) (& even joint heirs with Christ)

God has given us an example of this resurrection life within someone, showing how this Christ life overcomes the flesh, the world (system of man) & the devil. It is the life of Christ firstly & then the Apostle Paul`s life is displayed to us & the suffering he went through - ` if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.` (Rom. 8: 17)

`For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; ....` (1 John 5: 4)

`Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ`s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.` (2 Cor. 12: 9 & 10)

`But what things were gain to me these I have counted loss for Christ. ...& be found in Him, ....that I may know Him & the power of His resurrection, & the fellowship of His sufferings...if I ...may attain to the resurrection of the dead. Not that I have already attained .....but reaching forward ... I press towards the goal of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.....For our citizenship is in heaven,....` (Phil. 3: 7 – 20)

`God.. has begotten us to a living hope ....to an inheritance incorruptible & undefiled ... reserved in heaven for you.` (1 Peter 1: 3 & 4)

With Christ`s resurrection life within we are sons of God. And as sons we come into an inheritance with Christ. What is that inheritance? - to be like Him & to have responsibility & authority (under Christ) as a king & a priest.

`to those who are called according to His purpose......he also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son.....first born among many brethren.` (Rom. 8: 28 & 29)

`To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne....` (Rev. 3: 21)

`He shall sit & rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne,....` (Zech. 6: 13)

`Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood...what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, & not be called according to the order of Aaron.` (Heb. 7: 11)

`...Jesus, having become high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.` (Heb. 6: 20)

Summing up –

We are new creations (beings) in Christ, sons of God & joint heirs with Christ as Kings & Priests of His order. This order is the order of Melchizedek (King & a Priest) which is Royal, eternal & includes women. The `old` order, the `Aaronic priesthood was not Royal, only temporary & only for men.

New Order of Priests, (new creations, beings)
New Order of .....beings.

I think you really "crossed a line" when you altered Rev 1:6 above.
(your post #10523 which I already quoted in my post #10530)

<<< possible cultural difference : "Crossed a line" in USA means did something so
bad that it cannot be ignored >>>

You inserted "kingpriest" in place of God's actual words - so then
your new version reads as if the newly invented term "kingpriest" is rightly applied
to believers. An error which would falsely support/prove your Melchizedeck ideas.

can approach the Father as Abba Father ("child of God" or "son" of God - small "s" )

generally are in fellowship with God

==============================

==============================
Example of Silliness: Say someone convinced you that you are "in the order of James Bond" the movie spy

this results in:

you have a license to kill - Un-Spriptural you say? But "the James Bond order" trumps the other Scriptures

you can imitate Bond with a worldly lifestyle

more???

If you accept the premise that you are in the order of James Bond then you are open to
many possible re-writes of Scriptural doctrines. The key is to sell you on the original
premise.

==============================

No one could sell you on the James Bond idea, but say someone convinced you that
you are "in the order of Melchizedek"
( Note: Jesus is of the order of Melchizedek, but human beings are not. )

Now that person can define what the order of Melchizedek includes. Their definition
is wide open because this Melchizedek doctrine is not in the Bible. If you have bought
into their Melchizedek doctrine then they can have you dismiss other Scriptures because,
after all, you are of the order of Melchizedek.

==============================
Example of Dangerous: You are "in the order of Melchizedek"

this results in:

???

??

?

Notice the results are not known/given - not until first you are sold on the Melchizedek doctrine.

===========================================

GWB, these are some ideas to store in your back pocket as you watch this thread. My
hunch is it will be relevant.

I am pretty much done with Marylin after the Rev 1:6 thing, so I'll leave her
in your capable hands.

I think it would be helpful if all views would be put into an outline form. This way, we could compare all aspects.

I would like to begin with your outline, wishing34.

It would be helpful as to why this does not agree with your theology.

The concept of an outline, for me at least, is to present a complete overview of the material. It's like a ladder. I'd like to see where the ladder is going to take me before I start climbing.

Now I'm not so naive as to think that there's only one way to teach, but I can tell you the method being employed right now isn't working for me. Let me say again, I'm not AGAINST anyone presenting material to the best of their abilities... no one has been perfected in that department, but what I am saying is that the method being used is not working at all for me.

Marilyn's method may be working for others but to me this is what I'm getting:

1. Someone says something... (it may just be a random comment).
2. The provokes a grand dump of material supposedly relevant to the comment.
3. This of course causes others to make comments on bits and pieces of the grand dump of material that was supposed to answer the first comment.
4. More grand dumps of material (complete with their own section) follow, again, supposedly to answer the questions raised by others.
5. William's mind -- Blown fuse.

Now maybe my mind is predisposed to be being blown and others are grasping what is being said/taught and it makes perfect sense to them.

Or maybe this is a fundamental male/female gap that will never be bridged.

An outline does what a map would do for a person traveling. It presents an overview of where we are going and the route we are going to take to get there. I've got to have that map, or I'm not going to even start the journey. The random, piecemeal, presentation of the material may be giving some the impression that something great is being built but it is just a pile of stones to me... I need the blueprint to be able to grasp where we are going.

Now I know that this is going to sound like I'm just biased against a woman teaching (I'm not, and I have given ample evidence of that in previous posts) but I can clearly see the reasons for passages in the Bible that give the nod to the male when it comes to establishing doctrine. Both the bible and *my* experience backs this up.

Obviously you aren't having the problems that I've been having, Gillyann. I can only guess that it is because you are a woman and your mind is more capable of understanding another woman, but I'm not experiencing the same sort of satisfaction, maybe because I'm from Mars. (I'm going to get that book, Gary!)

So far, all of the questions I've raised have been answered with a massive dump of scripture passages. Perhaps one might even say that this is the proper way to do it, it even sounds good after all, who could argue with scripture?

A person could spend all day posting scripture and my response would always be AMEN, it's all true, but the thing that is missing are those connecting dots that make the scripture relevant to the questions being asked.

I haven't gone back over the whole thread to see if this next statement is absolutely true but it seems that all of the questions raised by Jman, Gary, James and myself (all men!!) at least have implications that have a bearing on specific Biblical passages.

We have given concrete reasons as to why certain passages do or do not apply and the only response is a re-iteration of the passages, plus a bunch more, yoked with a vague concept about the order of Melchisedec.

Now one shouldn't be too put off about the difficulties of explaining Melchisedec, Paul himself faced the same challenge.

But, and this is the crucial part, if someone is going to delve into such an esoteric doctrine, it needs to be presented in a clear and unambiguous manner. An outline is the least of our expectations. Even if it were a man presenting the doctrine he would face an almost insurmountable hurdle, but someone from Venus trying to teach someone from Mars? That is a challenge that borders on the impossible.

I appreciate everyone's ideas on how to present this topic that is being discussed.

I still think an outline from Jman is needed first for comparison. It would be a baseline for all of us to look at so we could stay on track. It would also offer valuable information on the topic. Not everybody reading or participating has your vast knowledge and gift of interpreting scripture, Jman. Maybe you could be so kind as to share one.

If you ask someone to present something like this, you should be willing to do the same.

Marilyn is new to OO. Be it male or female, I am sure we all want to show Marilyn our love and kindness that we learned at FA when people are talking about the Word.

I am sure that nobody here, who claim to be Overcomers, wants to be guilty of sarcasm, tongue in cheek, condescending to others, or maybe even having an unloving attitude.

For now, I don't think this has anything to do with the original topic. I think it is now about how we treat people in disagreements.

God has given many on OO talents for teaching, sharing, dividing scripture, and knowledge of faith.

"Faith works by love." If love is not involved in any conversation, how genius it may be, people are clanging cymbals in God's eyes.

Maybe you are right, William. Because this involves a woman's opinion, it might be impossible to come to a conclusion. However, it is not impossible to show a right attitude and love towards the brethren when talking about the Bible in any situation we find ourselves.

Many people have been discouraged and have left OO due to this very reason. I hope this will not be the case with this topic.

I hold no ill feelings towards anyone. This is just what I see. I hope my opinion will be considered.

Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah spoken of as "a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. 110:4), and so Jesus plays the role of the king-priest once and for all. According to the writer of Hebrews (7:13-17) Jesus is considered a priest in the order of Melchizedek because, like Melchizedek, Jesus was not a descendant of Aaron, and thus would not qualify for the Jewish priesthood under Law of Moses.

Melchizedek is referred to again in Hebrews 5:6-10; Hebrews 6:20; Hebrews 7:1-21: "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek"; and Hebrews 8:1.

And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises" (Hebrews 7:5-6).

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Hebrews 7:11-12).

The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the New Testament discussed this subject considerably, listing the following reasons for why the priesthood of Melchizedek is superior to the Aaronic priesthood:
1.Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek; later, the Levites would receive tithes from their countrymen. Since Aaron was in Abraham's loins then, it was as if the Aaronic priesthood were paying tithes to Melchizedek. (Heb. 7:4-10)
2.The one who blesses is always greater than the one being blessed. Thus, Melchizedek was greater than Abraham. As Levi was yet in the loins of Abraham, it follows that Melchizedek is greater than Levi. (Heb. 7:7-10)
3.If the priesthood of Aaron were effective, God would not have called a new priest in a different order in Psalm 110. (Heb. 7:11)
4.The basis of the Aaronic priesthood was ancestry; the basis of the priesthood of Melchizedek is everlasting life. That is, there is no interruption due to a priest's death. (Heb. 7:8,15-16,23-25)
5.Christ, being sinless, does not need a sacrifice for his own sins. (Heb. 7:26-27)
6.The priesthood of Melchizedek is more effective because it required a single sacrifice once and for all (Jesus), while the Levitical priesthood made endless sacrifices. (Heb. 7:27)
7.The Aaronic priests serve (or, rather, served) in an earthly copy and shadow of the heavenly Temple, which Jesus serves in. (Heb. 8:5)

The epistle goes on to say that the covenant of Jesus is superior to the covenant the Levitical priesthood is under. Some Christians hold that Melchizedek was a type of Christ, and some other Christians hold that Melchizedek indeed was Christ. Reasons provided include that Melchizedek's name means "king of righteousness" according to the author of Hebrews, and that being king of Salem makes Melchizedek the "king of peace." Heb. 7:3 states, "Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he (Melchizedek) remains a priest forever." Melchizedek gave Abraham bread and wine, which some Christians consider symbols of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, the sacrifice to confirm a covenant.

Here is further information concerning the Protestant view:

Quote:

Protestantism

Some Christian evangelicals and Messianic Jews hold that Christ will return as the true Messiah in the name. According to this view, which is taken from a literalist interpretation of Revelation 20, he will serve as both King and High Priest (e.g. the Melchizedek priesthood) in a coming millennium of the Messiah.

A more common Protestant theological understanding simply holds that the mysterious Melchizedek priesthood refers to Jesus as the eternal priest. His once-made sacrifice fulfilled the need for atonement of sins and he currently rules within the Church. In this via traditions of the Book of Hebrews, Jesus has ever been, is, and will ever be the only totally perfect priest (Hebrews 9–-7). Amillennialists believe that the messiah has already come, and his earthly role has been fulfilled. This is contrary to millenarianism which expects a pre-millennial return of Christ as Messiah.

Some Christians believe Jesus Christ the Son came to Earth at various times before the New Testament, including once as Melchizedek himself. These appearances are called Christophanies. Others still maintain that Melchizedek is actually Archangel Michael: Michael is designated in the apocryphal Book of Enoch and the canonical Book of Daniel as "the prince of Israel". He is the angel of forbearance and mercy (Enoch, xl:3) who taught Enoch the mysteries of clemency and justice (lxxi:2). In the book of Jubilees (i:27 and ii:1), the angel who is said to have instructed Moses on Mount Sinai and to have delivered to him the tables of the Law is most probably Michael. Still others believe that Michael is Jesus.

Don't know if this helps the conversation but it has been presented as a valid doctrine or teaching in Christianity. I remember that HEF dealt with this but I do not remember what was said on this teaching.

At this point I don't know what Marilyn is implying by the way she is sharing it. Because she is not making it plain for everyone to understand.

I still think an outline from Jman is needed first for comparison . . .

Say someone asks you for an outline of a sermon as you sit in
church listening to the sermon. But the sermon is only 2 minutes old.
You know the start point, but you could not make an outline of
the rest of it. We are only at the 2 minute mark in Marylin's sermon.

That man is so way off, so not what the Bible says but in the Dominionists camp of taking over the world for Christ.

I thought I had answered your questions as you said with scriptures to show what I was saying but I think there has been so many questions on the way that we have all gotten off on to many tangents. And it seems like I have given William another head ache & maybe raised his blood pressure.

I will do an out line because that is what I also like when people are talking to me, the bottom line as we say.

Just noticed your other comments back further on Melchizedek & didn`t realise there was so much variation. Would be good if you could find out what you had been taught on Christ`s priesthood because that is the essence of our topic.